<Tero.Kristo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: ext Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >>Sent: 08 March, 2010 19:16 >>To: Kristo Tero (Nokia-D/Tampere) >>Cc: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 9/9] OMAP3: PM: Added support for >>suspending to INACTIVE state >> >><Tero.Kristo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>[...] >> >>> True, ancient info there. OFF for example has been supported >>for ages already. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> + if (state != PWRDM_POWER_INACTIVE) >>>>> + while (!(pwrdm->pwrsts & (1 << state))) { >>>>> + if (state == PWRDM_POWER_OFF) >>>>> + return ret; >>>>> + state--; >>>>> + } >>>> >>>>I think all powerdomains can be inactive right? >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>>>I think it would be cleaner to just have all the pwrdm->pwrsts fields >>>>include intactive as a valid option. >>>> >>>>Something like the patch below. IIRC, you did something like this in >>>>one of the earlier versions of the patch. >>> >>> Yeah, something like this was done previously, however Paul did not >>> like the idea of changing the generic powerdomain code too much so I >>> dropped it completely. It is now done only via the support functions >>> in patch #1, and only done for the powerdomains that actually need >>> it for the cpuidle (mpu/core/neon.) It would be possible to add >>> support for the rest of the powerdomains also, but I decided to drop >>> this in favor of getting the patch set in. >> >>I'm not proposing changing any of the other powerdomain code. Just >>changing the PWRSTS_* defines, essentially so that INACTIVE is >>a valid state. >> >>That will eliminate the need for a special check for inactive in this >>patch. > > This is a chicken-egg problem. If you alter the PWRSTS_* defines, > you need to change implementation of pwrdm_set_next_pwrst() as it > would accept INACTIVE also, which is not supported by the code right > now. OK, I see the chicken-egg problem now. You're original version is ok with me. Thanks, Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
